DEBENDRANATH PANDA,CUTTACK vs. ITO,WARD 1 (1),CUTTACK, CUTTACK
Facts
The assessee's appeal was time-barred by 321 days due to the assessee suffering from spondylitis and bronchitis, requiring bed rest as advised by a doctor. The assessee's counsel argued that the delay was unintentional and due to circumstances beyond their control, and that the original order was ex-parte and passed without the assessee's knowledge.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the 321-day delay in filing the appeal, finding that the assessee had a reasonable cause. The Tribunal further held that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without providing an adequate opportunity for hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned? Whether the CIT(A) provided adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee before dismissing the appeal?
Sections Cited
Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY(KZ) RL REDDY(KZ)
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK ‘SMC’ BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT(KZ) BEFORE SHRI RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT(KZ) ITA No.188/CTK/2025 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Debendranath Debendranath Panda, Panda, M/s. M/s. Vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Cuttack 1), Cuttack S.N.Agency, S.N.Agency, Plot Plot No.62, No.62, Nayabazar, Nayabazar, Mahanadi Mahanadi Vihar, Vihar, Cuttack PAN/GIR No. AGKPP 3597 P (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Natabar Panda, Adv Natabar Panda, Adv Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 30 /06/202 /2025 Date of Pronouncement : 30/06/202 /2025 O R D E R The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. the order of ld. Addl/JCIT(A)-Agra dated 22.2.2024 in Appeal No. Appeal No. CIT(A), Cuttack/10177/2018 10177/2018-19 passed for Assessment Year 2016-17. 17.
The appeal is time barred by 321 The appeal is time barred by 321 days. The assessee has filed days. The assessee has filed condonation petition supported with affidavit condonation petition supported with affidavit, stating that the assessee the assessee was suffering from spondylitis spondylitis with back pain and acute bronchitis staring from with back pain and acute bronchitis staring from 12.4.2024 to 15.3.2025 12.4.2024 to 15.3.2025 and as per the advice of consulting Dr of consulting Dr. Laxmi Prasad Mohapatra, Prasad Mohapatra, the assessee was under bed rest. In his absence, no the assessee was under bed rest. In his absence, no
P a g e 1 | 4
ITA No.188/CTK/2025 Assessment Year : 2016-17
one was there to consult the advocate and to file the appeal in time. It is stated that the delay is neither deliberate nor intentional but due to the circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. Furthermore, Ld AR submitted that it is an exparte order and the assessee was not aware of the order passed by the ld CIT(A), therefore, due to lack of knowledge about the passing of order, the delay has occurred. Ld AR accordingly prayed that the delay in filing the appeal be condoned considering the health issue of the assessee.
On the other hand, ld Sr DR opposed the condonation petition.
After considering the condonation petition and the rival submissions, I am satisfied that the assessee has reasonable cause for not preferring the appeal within the due date. Accordingly, I condone the delay of 321 days and admit the appeal for adjudication.
At the time of hearing, ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that the ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. He prayed before the Bench that the impugned order be set aside and remitted back to the file of ld. AO for deciding it afresh.
On the other hand, ld Sr DR supported the orders of the lower authorities.
P a g e 2 | 4
ITA No.188/CTK/2025 Assessment Year : 2016-17
I have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the impugned order clearly shows that as there was no response to the notices to substantiate the claim with documentary evidences and submissions, ld CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO. Before me, ld AR undertakes that the assessee will cooperate the proceedings, if the matter is restored back to the file of the ld CIT(A). Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in order to meet the principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to his file with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co- operate with the proceedings before the ld CIT(A), failing which the CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 30/06/2025.
Sd/- (DUVVURU RL REDDY) VICE PRESIDENT P a g e 3 | 4
ITA No.188/CTK/2025 Assessment Year : 2016-17
Cuttack: Dated 30 /06/2025 B.K.Parida, Sr. PS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Debendranath Panda, M/s. S.N.Agency, Plot No.62, Nayabazar, Mahanadi Vihar, Cuttack 2. The Respondent : ITO, Ward-1(1), Cuttack 3. The Addl/JCIT(A)-Agra 4. Pr.CIT, Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy// By order
Asst.Registrar, Itat, cuttack
P a g e 4 | 4
